Advertisement

Behavior Genetics

, Volume 27, Issue 5, pp 489–498 | Cite as

Correlated Responses to Selection for Developmental Period in Bactrocera cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae): Time of Mating and Daily Activity Rhythms

  • Takahisa Miyatake
Article

Abstract

Comparisons of “time of mating” (the time copulation begins) between lines selected for short and long developmental periods have been made in the melon fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae. These comparisons showed that longer developmental periods were associated with later initiation of mating. Crosses were also made between selected lines to ascertain the genetic basis of developmental period and time of mating. Comparisons of daily activity rhythms for four types of behavior (locomotion, preening, feeding, and wing vibration) between the selected lines showed the following; (1) locomotion and preening occurred in daytime for the short developmental period lines, versus mainly at night for the long developmental period lines; (2) feeding behavior occurred in daytime for both the short and the long developmental period lines; and (3) wing vibration, a component of courtship behavior of males, occurred at dusk for the short developmental period lines and at night for the long developmental period lines.

Bactrocera cucurbitae correlated response developmental period genetic correlation mating time selection 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Arakaki, N., Kuba, H., and Soemori, H. (1984). Mating behavior of the oriental fruit fly, Dacus dorsalis Hendel (Diptera: Tephritidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 19:42–51.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, G., and Koufopanou, V. (1986). The cost of reproduction. Oxford Surv. Ecol. Biol. 3:83–131.Google Scholar
  3. De Lima, I. S., Howse, P. E., and Salles, A. B. (1994). Reproductive behaviour of the south American fruit fly Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae): Laboratory and field studies. Physiol. Entomol. 19:271–277.Google Scholar
  4. Drew, R. A. I. (1989). The taxonomy and distribution of tropical and subtropical Dacinae. In Robinson, A. S., and Hooper, G. (eds.), Fruit Flies: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control, Vol. 3A, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 9–14.Google Scholar
  5. Falconer, D. S. (1989). Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, 3rd ed., Longman, England.Google Scholar
  6. Fitt, G. P. (1981a). Responses of female dacinae to “male” lures and their relationship to patterns of mating behaviour and pheromone response. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 29:87–97.Google Scholar
  7. Fitt, G. P. (1981b). Inter-and intraspecific responses to sex pheromones in laboratory bioassays by females of three species of Tephritid fruit flies from northern Australia. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 30:40–44.Google Scholar
  8. Foote, R. H., Blanc, F. L., and Norrbom, A. L. (1993). Handbook of the Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) of America North of Mexico, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  9. Graves, J. L., Luckinbill, L. S., and Nichols, A. (1988). A flight duration and wing beat frequency in long-and short-lived Drosophila melanogaster. J. Insect Physiol. 34:1021–1026.Google Scholar
  10. Hall, J. C. (1995). Tripping along the trail to the molecular mechanisms of biological clocks. Trends Neurosci. 18:230–240.Google Scholar
  11. Hill, W. G., and Caballero, A. (1992). Artificial selection experiments. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23:287–310.Google Scholar
  12. Hillesheim, E., and Stearns, S. C. (1991). The responses of Drosophila melanogaster to artificial selection on body weight and its phenotypic plasticity in two larval food environments. Evolution 45:1909–1923.Google Scholar
  13. Hoffmann, A. A., and Parsons, P. A. (1991). Evolutionary Genetics and Environmental Stress, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Hudak, M. J., and Gromko, M. H. (1989). Response to selection for early and late development of sexual maturity in Drosophila melanogaster. Anim. Behav. 38:344–351.Google Scholar
  15. Iwahashi, O., and Majima, T. (1986). Lek formation and male-male competition in the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 21:70–75.Google Scholar
  16. Kakinohana, H. (1994). The melon fly eradication program in Japan. In Calkins, C. O., Klassen, W., and Liedo, P. (eds.), Fruit Flies and the Sterile Insect Technique, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 223–236.Google Scholar
  17. Kakinohana, H. (1996). Studies on the mass production of the melon flies, Bactrocera cucurbitae Coquillett. Bull. Okinawa Agr. Exp. Sta. 16:1–102 (in Japanese with English summary).Google Scholar
  18. Konopka, R. J., and Benzer, S. (1971). Clock mutants of Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 68:2112–2116.Google Scholar
  19. Koyama, J., Nakamori, H., and Kuba, H. (1986). Mating behavior of wild and mass-reared strains of the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae), in a field cage. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 21:203–209.Google Scholar
  20. Kuba, H., and Itô, Y. (1993). Remating inhibition in the melon fly, Bactrocera (=Dacus) cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae): Copulation with spermless males inhibits female remating. J. Ethol. 11:23–28.Google Scholar
  21. Kuba, H., and Koyama, J. (1982). Mating behavior of the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae): Comparative studies of one wild and two laboratory strains. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 17:559–568.Google Scholar
  22. Kuba, H., and Koyama, J. (1985). Mating behavior of wild melon flies, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae) in a field cage: Courtship behavior. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 20:365–372.Google Scholar
  23. Kuba, H., and Soemori, H. (1988). Characteristics of copulation duration, hatchability of eggs and remating intervals in the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae). Jpn. J. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 32:321–324 (in Japanese with English summary).Google Scholar
  24. Kuba, H., Koyama, J., and Prokopy, R. J. (1984). Mating behavior of wild melon flies, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillet (Diptera: Tephritidae), in a field cages: Distribution and behavior of flies. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 19:367–373.Google Scholar
  25. Kyriacou, C. P., Oldroyd, M., Wood, J., Sharp, M., and Hill, M. (1990). Clock mutations alter developmental timing in Drosophila. Heredity 64:395–401.Google Scholar
  26. Landolt, P. J., and Hendrichs, J. (1983). Reproductive behaviour of the papaya fruit fly, Toxotrypana curvicauda Gerstaecker (Diptera: Tephritidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 76:413–417.Google Scholar
  27. Miyatake, T. (1993). Difference in the larval and pupal periods between mass-reared and wild strains of the melon fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) (Diptera: Tephritidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 28:577–581.Google Scholar
  28. Miyatake, T. (1995). Two-way artificial selection for developmental period in Bactrocera cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 88:848–855.Google Scholar
  29. Miyatake, T. (1996). Comparison of adult life history traits in lines artificially selected for long and short larval and pupal developmental periods in the melon fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 31:335–343.Google Scholar
  30. Miyatake, T., and Haraguchi, D. (1996). Mating success in Bactrocera cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae) under different rearing densities. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 89:284–289.Google Scholar
  31. Miyatake, T., and Yamagishi, M. (1993). Active quality control in mass reared melon flies: Quantitative genetic aspects. In Management of Insect Pests: Nuclear and Related Molecular and Genetic Techniques, IAEA, Vienna, pp. 201–213.Google Scholar
  32. Nakamori, H., and Kakinohana, H. (1980). Mass-production of the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett, in Okinawa, Japan. Rev. Plant Prot. Res. 13:37–53.Google Scholar
  33. Nakamori, H., Kakinohana, H., and Yamagishi, M. (1992). Automated mass production system for fruit flies based on the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae). In Anderson, T. E., and Leppla, N. C. (eds.), Advances in Insect Rearing for Research and Pest Management, Westview Press, Oxford, pp. 441–454.Google Scholar
  34. Nielsen, J., Peixoto, A. A., Piccin, A., Costa, R., Kyriacou, C. P., and Chlmers, D. (1994). Big flies, small repeats: The “Thr-Gly” region of the period gene in Diptera. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:839–853.Google Scholar
  35. Nunney, L. (1996). The response to selection for fast larval development in Drosophila melanogaster and its effect on adult weight: An example of a fitness trade-off. Evolution 50:1193–1204.Google Scholar
  36. Partridge, L., and Fowler, K. (1992). Direct and correlated responses to selection on age at reproduction in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 46:76–91.Google Scholar
  37. Partridge, L., and Fowler, K. (1993). Responses and correlated responses to artificial selection on thorax length in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 47:213–226.Google Scholar
  38. Prokopy, R. J., and Hendrichs, J. (1979). Mating behaviour of Ceratitis capitata on a field-caged host tree. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 72:642–648.Google Scholar
  39. Prokopy, R. J., Bennett, E. W., and Bush, G. L. (1972). Mating behaviour in Rhagoletis pomonella. II. Temporal organization. Can. Entomol. 104:97–104.Google Scholar
  40. Reppert, S. M., Tsai, T., Roca, A. L., and Sauman, I. (1994). Cloning of a structural and functional homolog of the circadian clock gene period from the giant silkmoth Antheraea pernyi. Neuron 13:1167–1176.Google Scholar
  41. Robacker, D. C., Mangan, R. L., Moreno, D. S., and Tarshis Moreno, A. M. (1991). Mating behavior and male mating success in wild Anastrepha ludens (Diptera: Tephritidae) on a field caged host tree. J. Insect Behav. 4:471–487.Google Scholar
  42. Robertson, F. W. (1963). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 6. The genetic correlation between the duration of the larval period and body size in relation to larval diet. Genet. Res. Cambr. 4:74–92.Google Scholar
  43. Shimizu, T., Miyatake, T., Watari, Y., and Arai, T. (1997). A gene pleiotropically controlling developmental and circadian periods in the melon fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae). Heredity 79 (in press).Google Scholar
  44. Smith, P. H. (1989). Behavioural partitioning of the day and circadian rhythmicity. In Robinson, A. S., and Hooper, G. (eds.), Fruit Flies: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control, Vol. 3B, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 325–341.Google Scholar
  45. Stearns, S. C. (1992). The Evolution of Life Histories, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  46. Suenaga, H. (1991). Correlated responses of mating behavior of Dacus cucurbitae to selections for early and late reproduction or short and long larval period. In Kawasaki, K., Iwahashi, O., and Kaneshiro, K. Y. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Biology and Control of Fruit Flies, Okinawa Prefecture, Ginowan, Japan, pp. 327–330.Google Scholar
  47. Suzuki, Y., and Koyama, J. (1980). Temporal aspects of mating behavior of the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae): A comparison between laboratory and wild strains. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 15:215–224.Google Scholar
  48. Yamagishi, M., and Tsubaki, Y. (1990). Copulation duration and sperm transfer in the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 25:517–519.Google Scholar
  49. Zervas, G. A., and Economopoulos, A. P. (1982). Mating frequency in caged populations of wild and artificially reared (normal or γ-sterilized) olive fruit flies. Environ. Entomol. 11:17–20.Google Scholar
  50. Zwaan, B., Bijlsma, R., and Hoekstra, R. F. (1995). Artificial selection for developmental time in Drosophila melanogaster in relation to the evolution of aging: Direct and correlated responses. Evolution 49:635–648.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takahisa Miyatake
    • 1
  1. 1.Okinawa Prefectural Agricultural Experiment StationNaha, OkinawaJapan

Personalised recommendations